Appearance And Reality: The Contradiction Between Reality Vs. Reality
When people see the world or aspects of the world and reality, it is usually perceived and taken as the truth. It might seem easier to believe that the world is as it appears but there is more to the world then what is seen through immediate experiences, details that are left out that ensure certainty. This is why within the essay I will be discussing why it is not justified to believe that the world is as it appears. I will bring up this contradiction between appearance and reality using the reading and finding of philosophers such as Descartes, Berkeley, Russell and Plato who have in their own way tried to come to an understanding as to what appearance and reality are and if the world is truly as it appears.
When looking at the definitions …show more content…
1912). This idea of experience stems from the fact that when we see the world or reality we see it through (turn to) immediate experiences (the use of our five senses) and assume that the world is as appears to be. Just because one might experience the world through this immediate experience it does not mean that they are justified in believing that it is in fact truthful or that it is the way it appears to be. Russell uses the table as an example, he states that when one looks at the table, the way it appears to be is not the true form because there are various perspectives of that table on the aspects regarding the five senses (sight, smell, touch, hearing and taste.) so people have different opinions, no single opinion/ observation is correct because no …show more content…
1713) Russell brings in the findings of Berkeley and from this I was able to deduce some findings. In the beginning Berkeley was certain that reality is as it appears through what is called sensory perception (also known as immediate experience) on the basis of there being no concrete distinction between appearance and reality. Russell does agree with Berkeley that sensory perceptions ( immediate experiences) are something that we have through immediate access and these sensory perceptions are mind dependent which concluded that we have no direct evidence from the sensory perception that are mind independent objects ( Russell, B.1912). But the only way Berkeley can be certain there is no indirect evidence of mind independent object from sensory
When looking at the definitions …show more content…
1912). This idea of experience stems from the fact that when we see the world or reality we see it through (turn to) immediate experiences (the use of our five senses) and assume that the world is as appears to be. Just because one might experience the world through this immediate experience it does not mean that they are justified in believing that it is in fact truthful or that it is the way it appears to be. Russell uses the table as an example, he states that when one looks at the table, the way it appears to be is not the true form because there are various perspectives of that table on the aspects regarding the five senses (sight, smell, touch, hearing and taste.) so people have different opinions, no single opinion/ observation is correct because no …show more content…
1713) Russell brings in the findings of Berkeley and from this I was able to deduce some findings. In the beginning Berkeley was certain that reality is as it appears through what is called sensory perception (also known as immediate experience) on the basis of there being no concrete distinction between appearance and reality. Russell does agree with Berkeley that sensory perceptions ( immediate experiences) are something that we have through immediate access and these sensory perceptions are mind dependent which concluded that we have no direct evidence from the sensory perception that are mind independent objects ( Russell, B.1912). But the only way Berkeley can be certain there is no indirect evidence of mind independent object from sensory